MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160693010 · doi:10.1002/smi.3068

Articulating the Trauma‐Informed Theory of Individual Health Behavior

2021· article· en· W3160693010 on OpenAlexafffund
Charles Marks, Jennifer Pearson, María Luisa Zúñiga, Natasha K. Martin, Dan Werb, Laramie R. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueStress and Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute on Drug AbuseOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science
KeywordsPsychological resiliencePsychological interventionPsychologyMental healthHealth careSubstance abuseFoundation (evidence)Psychological traumaPsychiatryMedicineClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exposure to trauma increases the risk of engaging in detrimental health behaviours such as tobacco and substance use. In response, the United States Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration developed Trauma-Informed Care (TIC), an organisational framework for improving the provision of behavioural health care to account for the role exposure to trauma plays in patients' lives. We adapt TIC to introduce a novel theory of behaviour change, the Trauma-Informed Theory of Individual Health Behavior (TTB). TTB posits that individual capacity to undertake intentional health-promoting behaviour change is dependent on three factors: (1) the forms and severity of trauma they have been and are exposed to, (2) how this trauma physiologically manifests (i.e., the trauma response) and (3) resilience to undertake behaviour change despite this trauma response. We define each of these factors and their relationships to one another. We anticipate that the introduction of TTB will provide a foundation for developing theory-driven research, interventions, and policies that improve behavioural health outcomes in trauma-affected populations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStress and HealthSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207